NVIDIA GeForce 825M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 825M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 825M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 11.1x lower typical power consumption: 33 Watt vs 365 Watt
- Around 5% higher memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 1707 MHz
- Around 23% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 15796 vs 12811
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 27 January 2014 vs 24 March 2011 |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 365 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 1707 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15796 vs 12811 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590
- Around 43% higher core clock speed: 1215 MHz vs 850 MHz
- 2.6x more texture fill rate: 77.7 billion / sec vs 30.11 GTexel / s
- 2.7x more pipelines: 1024 vs 384
- 3.4x better floating-point performance: 2x 1,244.2 gflops vs 722.7 gflops
- 3x more maximum memory size: 3072 MB (1536 MB per GPU) vs 1 GB
- 4.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3341 vs 782
- Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 394 vs 247
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1215 MHz vs 850 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 77.7 billion / sec vs 30.11 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 vs 384 |
Floating-point performance | 2x 1,244.2 gflops vs 722.7 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 3072 MB (1536 MB per GPU) vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3341 vs 782 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 394 vs 247 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 825M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 825M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 782 | 3341 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 247 | 394 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15796 | 12811 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 30.921 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1116.126 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.799 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 49.114 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.239 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4118 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3330 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4118 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3330 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 825M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
Code name | GK208 | GF110 |
Launch date | 27 January 2014 | 24 March 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 786 | 789 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $699 | |
Price now | $184 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 30.41 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 941 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 1215 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 722.7 gflops | 2x 1,244.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 1024 |
Texture fill rate | 30.11 GTexel / s | 77.7 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 365 Watt |
Transistor count | 1300 Million | 3,000 million |
CUDA cores | 1024 | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 3x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort, Three Dual Link DVI-IMini DisplayPort |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | Two 8-pin |
Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 11" (280 mm) (27.9 cm) | |
SLI options | Quad | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.2 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 3072 MB (1536 MB per GPU) |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 327.7 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 768-bit (384-bit per GPU) |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1707 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
SLI | ||
Surround |